Jeff Tabaco and Thom Watson, both of Daly City, listen to speakers during a "Free the Tapes" and "Motion to Marry" rally preceding the circuit court hearing on Proposition 8 in front of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday, December 8, 2011 in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Jeff Tabaco and Thom Watson, both of Daly City, listen to speakers...

Image 2 of 39

Eduardo Rico and Nick Cobian hold each other as they walk through the Castro district, Monday August 16, 2010, in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lacy Atkins, THE CHRONICLE

Eduardo Rico and Nick Cobian hold each other as they walk through...

Image 3 of 39

Robert Huddleston (left) held his partner of four years Chris Hollar after the media closed in and they realized they wouldn't be able to marry Thursday. After US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker lifted a stay on samesex marriages Thursday August 12, 2010, hopes were dashed after it was revealed that the lifting of the stay won't go into effect until August 18.

Photo: Brant Ward, The Chronicle

Robert Huddleston (left) held his partner of four years Chris...

Image 4 of 39

There was elation in front of San Francisco City Hall as couples believed the stay had been lifted and marriages could begin. After US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker lifted a stay on samesex marriages Thursday August 12, 2010, hopes were dashed after it was revealed that the lifting of the stay won't go into effect until August 18.

Photo: Brant Ward, The Chronicle

There was elation in front of San Francisco City Hall as couples...

Image 5 of 39

A man drapes himself with the rainbow flag in supporter of the overturning of Proposition 8 assemble at City Hall after marching down Market Street in San Francisco, Calif., on Wednesday, August 04, 2010.

Photo: Chad Ziemendorf, The Chronicle

A man drapes himself with the rainbow flag in supporter of the...

Image 6 of 39

Molly McKay and John Lewis celebrate at the Phillip Burton Federal Building after learning Chief U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker ruled that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional in San Francisco, Calif., on Wednesday, Aug. 4, 2010.

Siddiqi Ray (cq) and Elizabeth McElhinney take wedding photos outside of City Hall after being married on Sunday afternoon after their same sex marriage. They arrived from Minneapolis the night before. They contemplated going when Ray's mother informed them of the wedding. Their friend gave them frequent flyer miles to use for their tickets and bought their outfits the morning of their departure. Tanya: Their number is 612-961-4119 if you need it. Couples line up in front of City Hall on Sunday night to be first in line to be married on 2/15/04 in San Francisco, CA.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, SFC

Siddiqi Ray (cq) and Elizabeth McElhinney take wedding photos...

Image 9 of 39

In a 2-1 ruling, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional. People react on the courthouse steps as the decision is announced.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

In a 2-1 ruling, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San...

Image 10 of 39

A procession begins after, in a 2-1 ruling, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

A procession begins after, in a 2-1 ruling, the Ninth U.S. Circuit...

Image 11 of 39

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill, demonstrate outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will deliver a ruling today on whether the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill,...

Image 12 of 39

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill, demonstrate outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will deliver a ruling today on whether the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill,...

Image 13 of 39

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill, demonstrate outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will deliver a ruling today on whether the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill,...

Image 14 of 39

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill, demonstrate outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals will deliver a ruling today on whether the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Opponents of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill,...

Image 15 of 39

Same-sex couple Frank Capley-Alfano (L) and Joe Capley-Alfano kiss as they celebrate outside of San Francisco City Hall on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Same-sex couple Frank Capley-Alfano (L) and Joe Capley-Alfano kiss...

Image 16 of 39

Same-sex couple Breana Hansen (L) and Monica Chacon kiss as they celebrate outside of San Francisco City Hall on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

Same-sex couple Breana Hansen (L) and Monica Chacon kiss as they...

Image 17 of 39

An opponent of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill, cries as he celebrates outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

An opponent of Proposition 8, California's anti-gay marriage bill,...

Image 18 of 39

(Left to right): Same-sex couples Kristen Orbin, Teresa Rowe, John Lewis and Stuart Gaffney embrace as they celebrate outside of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

(Left to right): Same-sex couples Kristen Orbin, Teresa Rowe, John...

Image 19 of 39

Supporters of same-sex marriage react outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Supporters of same-sex marriage react outside the James R. Browning...

Image 20 of 39

Teresa Rowe (foreground left to right), Kristin Orbin, John Lewis and Stuart Gaffney react with other Proposition 8 supporters outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Teresa Rowe (foreground left to right), Kristin Orbin, John Lewis...

Image 21 of 39

Teresa Rowe (foreground left to right), Kristin Orbin, Stuart Gaffney and John Lewis react with other supporters of same-sex marriage outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Teresa Rowe (foreground left to right), Kristin Orbin, Stuart...

Image 22 of 39

Teresa Rowe (foreground left to right), Kristin Orbin, John Lewis and Stuart Gaffney react with other Proposition 8 supporters outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Bob Horowitz (left to right) and Rev. Will McGarvey, East County Shared Ministry Pastor read the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling as Proposition 8 supporters react outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Bob Horowitz (left to right) and Rev. Will McGarvey, East County...

Image 25 of 39

Solonua Solonua, left, is confronted by a same-sex activist, while he preaches at couples as they walk towards City Hall, Tuesday February 7, 2012, to celebrate the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Proposition 8 in unconstitutional, in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lacy Atkins, The Chronicle

Solonua Solonua, left, is confronted by a same-sex activist, while...

Image 26 of 39

A same-sex couple holds hands during a press conference at San Francisco City Hall on February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, California. A three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the voter-approved Proposition 8 measure violates the civil rights of gay men and lesbians.

Photo: Justin Sullivan, Getty Images

A same-sex couple holds hands during a press conference at San...

Image 27 of 39

Frank Capley-Alfano (l to r) kisses Joe Capley-Alfano as they stand on the steps of San Francisco City Hall celebrating with others after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif.

Monica Chacon and Breana Hansen share a kiss outside San Francisco City Hall as they celebrate with others after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Monica Chacon and Breana Hansen share a kiss outside San Francisco...

Image 29 of 39

Bob Sodervick of San Francisco waves a rainbow flag outside of the James R. Browning United States Courthouse as he demonstrates with others while waiting to hear the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Bob Sodervick of San Francisco waves a rainbow flag outside of the...

Image 30 of 39

Ben Gertzfield (left) embraces fiance William Hamilton during a celebration at the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender Community Center.

Solonua Solonua preaches as same-sex couples walk towards City Hall, Tuesday February 7, 2012, to celebrate the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that Proposition 8 in unconstitutional, in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lacy Atkins, The Chronicle

Solonua Solonua preaches as same-sex couples walk towards City...

Image 35 of 39

Lee Hawn holds his wedding certificate as he listens to other same-sex couples during the celebration defeating Proposition 8 at the Lesbian, Gay Transgender Center, Tuesday February 7, 2012, in San Francisco, Calif. Hawn and his husband Randy Allgaier were married in 2008 after being together for over 20 years. Hawn became a widower in November 2010 when Allgaier died of AIDS complications. " If he was here today he would be proud that we were married," said Hawn.

Photo: Lacy Atkins, The Chronicle

Lee Hawn holds his wedding certificate as he listens to other...

Image 36 of 39

Same sex marriage supporters celebrate outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Same sex marriage supporters celebrate outside the James R....

Image 37 of 39

Same sex marriage supporters march from the James R. Browning United States Courthouse to San Francisco City Hall on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Same sex marriage supporters march from the James R. Browning...

Image 38 of 39

Larry Robles (l to r) and Rick Evans listen with other supporters of same sex marriage as Molly McKay (not shown) with Marriage Equality, reads the ruling on the steps outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Photo: Lea Suzuki, The Chronicle

Larry Robles (l to r) and Rick Evans listen with other supporters...

Image 39 of 39

Molly McKay with Marriage Equality reacts with supporters of same sex marriage outside the James R. Browning United States Courthouse after a federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional on Tuesday, February 7, 2012 in San Francisco, Calif. A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

A federal appeals court declared California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional Tuesday in a ruling that was both historic and, perhaps more importantly, narrowly drafted.

The 2-1 ruling by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco was the first ever by a federal appellate court to overturn any of the recent proliferation of state laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

Gay rights advocates gathered in San Francisco and elsewhere to cheer the court's conclusion that the November 2008 ballot measure, promoted as a life preserver for traditional marriages in California, was actually rooted in the constitutionally suspect soil of private moral judgments.

A federal appeals court declared California's ban on same-sex marriage unconstitutional today, saying a state can't revoke gay rights solely because a majority of its voters disapprove of homosexuality.

Media: San Francisco Chronicle

"Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California, and to officially reclassify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples," said Judge Stephen Reinhardt in the majority opinion.

He said there was no evidence for the claims of Prop. 8 sponsors that banning same-sex marriage would promote children's welfare or responsible procreation, and no legal basis to exclude an entire group of people from marrying merely because of tradition.

"It brings you to tears," James Pearman, 60, of Daly City, said at a rally outside the Seventh Street courthouse after the ruling was announced. "You know that you are equal. You know that you have rights, that children (of gay parents) will have rights."

Marriages still on hold

"We will immediately appeal this misguided decision that disregards the will of more than 7 million Californians who voted to restore marriage as the unique union of only a man and a woman," said Andy Pugno, lawyer for the Prop. 8 campaign committee, a conservative religious coalition called Protect Marriage.

But the ruling appeared to be crafted to improve its chances for survival in the high court, and perhaps to avoid review altogether. As commentators noted, the court stepped back from deciding the constitutionality of same-sex marriage and focused instead on the causes and effects of one California ballot measure.

"This decision was clearly written with a mind toward getting (the Supreme Court) not to take" the case, said Evan Gerstmann, a political science professor at Loyola Marymount University and author of two books on same-sex marriage. "The court focused on specific facts in California" and issued a ruling that might not apply to any other state, he said.

If the Supreme Court takes up the case, said Rick Hasen, a law professor at UC Irvine, it could follow the appeals court's lead and strike down Prop. 8 "without embracing a major holding recognizing a right to same-sex marriage generally."

Reinhardt, one of the nation's most liberal judges, took a legally conservative approach that was closely tied to the history of Prop. 8.

The initiative, approved by 52 percent of the voters, amended the California Constitution to undo a May 2008 ruling by the state Supreme Court, which said the state's then-existing ban on same-sex marriage violated California's constitutional guarantee of equality.

Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker concluded the nation's first federal court trial on same-sex marriage by ruling in August 2010 that gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry their chosen partner, and that Prop. 8 discriminated on the basis of sexual orientation and gender.

The appeal

The measure's sponsors appealed, arguing that it was not discriminatory for voters to reaffirm the historic definition of marriage. Protect Marriage also argued that Walker should have been disqualified, and his ruling set aside, because he had not disclosed that he is a gay man with a longtime partner, whom he could marry if his ruling were upheld.

The appeals court rejected the disqualification argument unanimously Tuesday, saying a judge can remain on a case even if its outcome might affect him, along with other members of the public. The court also agreed with Walker's conclusion about Prop. 8, but for different reasons.

Reinhardt, joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, invoked two past U.S. Supreme Court rulings. One was a 1973 decision overturning a federal law that barred households of unrelated people, such as "hippie communes," from qualifying for food stamps. The other, in 1996, struck down a Colorado initiative prohibiting local governments from enacting civil rights laws protecting gays and lesbians.

In both cases, the high court said the government violates equal protection when it withdraws rights in order to harm a politically unpopular group or express disapproval of a vulnerable minority. The 1996 ruling was written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, who could cast the decisive vote in a future marriage case.

There is no need to decide in this case whether gays and lesbians have a fundamental right to marry, Reinhardt said, because Prop. 8 is unconstitutional for a separate reason: Like the Colorado initiative, it stripped rights from a minority group - rights the group held under the earlier California court ruling - for no apparent reason other than moral disapproval.

Video: Court: CA Gay Marriage Ban Is Unconstitutional

Court: CA Gay Marriage Ban Is Unconstitutional

Media: San Francisco Chronicle

Other rationales put forward by Protect Marriage don't hold up to inspection, Reinhardt said - outlawing same-sex marriage doesn't encourage men and women to marry, enhance existing marriages, or protect children being raised by California families, including tens of thousands of same-sex households. He also said evidence at the trial showed that the Prop. 8 campaign appealed to voters' fears of homosexuals.

Dissenting opinion

With no demonstrated "legitimate purpose," Reinhardt said, the court must conclude that the ballot measure was rooted in "disapproval of gays and lesbians as a class."

In dissent, Judge N. Randy Smith said Prop. 8 must be upheld if there was any reasonable basis for its enactment. For example, he said, Californians could have concluded - rightly or wrongly - that children were better off with married, biological parents, and that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples would encourage responsible child-rearing.

Under the deferential standard established by past rulings, Smith said, "I am not convinced that Proposition 8 lacks a rational relationship to legitimate state interests."

Proposition 8

What's next: Prop. 8's sponsors plan to appeal. They could ask the full appeals court for a rehearing before an 11-judge panel or appeal directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Status of same-sex marriage: Prop. 8's ban would be lifted in 21 days if the ruling is not appealed. But a request for a rehearing would maintain the ban while the appeal was pending, and it would likely stay in effect until the Supreme Court finished with the case.

The rulings

The measure: In a 2-1 decision, the court said Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in California, is unconstitutional because it withdrew marital rights from gays and lesbians for no evident reason other than moral disapproval of homosexuality.

The judge: The court also ruled 3-0 that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who had presided over the Prop. 8 trial in 2010, was under no obligation to disclose at the time that he was a gay man with a longtime partner, whom he could marry if same-sex marriage were legal.

Reactions to the ruling from around the country

"San Francisco stands ready to begin marrying same-sex couples, and we remain as deeply committed to the fight for marriage equality today as we did nearly eight years ago when then-Mayor Gavin Newsom started one of the most important civil rights issues of our generation to ensure equality for all."

"Today, unelected judges cast aside the will of the people of California who voted to protect traditional marriage. I believe marriage is between a man and a woman and, as president, I will protect traditional marriage, and appoint judges who interpret the Constitution as it is written and not according to their own politics and prejudices."

"Today the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, reiterating the California Supreme Court's 1948 comment in ending the ban on interracial marriage that marriage is a 'fundamental right of all citizens,' upheld what we have long held to be true and just - that no loving couple shall be denied the opportunity to marry in California."

State Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco

"The Ninth Circuit made a strong statement that laws must not target the LGBT community for discrimination and all of our state's families deserve to enjoy fair and equal treatment under the law."

"This is the one last big piece of the civil rights struggle and it's happening in our lifetime, in real time, and I'm very proud of this court's decision."

Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom

"We will immediately appeal this misguided decision that disregards the will of more than 7 million Californians who voted to restore marriage as the unique union of only a man and woman. We are confident that the rights of California voters will finally win out."

Andy Pugno, general counsel for Protect Marriage

"Today's action by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is an eloquent reaffirmation of Dr. King's statement that 'the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.' "

Assembly Speaker John Pérez

"This is an affront to the voters of California. Twice in one decade, Californians affirmed through the ballot that they want traditional marriage, and twice, a handful of judges has vetoed millions of voters. This is judicial activism at its worst."

State Sen. Doug LaMalfa, R-Richvale, Butte County

Timeline of same-sex marriage in California

Feb. 12, 2004: San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom authorizes the county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon are the first to marry.

Feb. 25: Three San Francisco residents ask the state Supreme Court to put an immediate halt to the weddings.

Feb. 27: California Attorney General Bill Lockyer asks the state Supreme Court to stop San Francisco officials from issuing same-sex marriage licenses and invalidate gay and lesbian weddings that have taken place at City Hall since Feb. 12.

March 11: The California Supreme Court orders an immediate halt to same-sex weddings in San Francisco and says it will decide whether Newsom exceeded his authority in allowing the marriages.

March 11: San Francisco responds by suing the state in Superior Court, contending that California's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional.

March 12: Six unwed gay and lesbian couples file suit in Superior Court, challenging the state's marriage law on constitutional grounds. The suit is later consolidated with the city's.

May 25: California's Supreme Court justices hear arguments on the legality of San Francisco's same-sex marriages.

July 15: The U.S. Senate defeats the Bush administration's proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage.

Aug. 12: The California Supreme Court rules that Newsom exceeded his authority when he authorized same-sex marriages in San Francisco and voids 3,955 marriages that were recorded between Feb. 12 and March 11.

March 14, 2005: A San Francisco Superior Court judge rules that a California law defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman violates guarantees of equality and fundamental rights in the state Constitution.

Oct. 5, 2006: A state appeals court rules gays and lesbians have no constitutional right to marry in California, and any change giving them that right must come from state lawmakers or the voters, rather than the legal system.

Nov. 13: San Francisco appeals to the state Supreme Court to review the constitutionality of California's ban on same-sex marriage and asks it to rule that the law violates the rights of gays and lesbians.

Sept. 7, 2007: For a second time in three years, the Legislature approves a bill to give same-sex couples the right to marry in California. Schwarzenegger later vetoes it.